ggenfandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:Zaku II
F versus J Ahh, this is a discussion we were bound to have eventually. 1. The Zaku II from the original series - like way back when it just aired - was given the MS-06 model number, and that was that, IIRC. It wasn't until afterwards, during MSV times, when they came out and said: hey, the ground and space models are slightly different; and then they split it up into MS-06F and MS-06J. 2. The F and J distinction is important when it comes to certain variations in MSV and later, as certain units were variations on one or the other. 3. The main problem is that not all G Generation games actually make this distinction. For example, Spirits has two separate units, for the F and J types, respectively - and they have different attributes, development paths, etc. However, World does not. In fact, it just lists the Zaku II as MS-06, without an F or J. 4. To make matters worse, Portable includes an F type, a J type, and a somewhat weaker unit that's just called "Zaku II", all in the original Gundam series gallery. So I'm not sure how you want to handle this for the wiki. It's my stance that we should use the model number given in the latest G Generation game as the model number for the unit's article - this is why I changed the Guncannon's model number to RX-77, since that's what it is in World(and presumably 3D). However, that clearly doesn't really work here. Should we have three articles - MS-06F, MS-06J, and just MS-06? Or should we keep any non-specified MS-06 information in the MS-06F article? ~ Darkslime (talk) 18:59, August 21, 2012 (UTC) :The distinction between F and J type is already being made. This page is for the F type and the "combo" Zaku when present because the F type is regarded as the "default". The F is dropped from the name by default since name is based on latest appearance though there are exceptions. :As for Portable, there is no third weaker Zaku II, that's a Zaku I. I'm guessing you were looking at Portable's Japanese wiki which has a typo in the unit name and calls the Zaku I a Zaku II. This is an example of why I said that information shouldn't be pulled directly from the other wikis. :As for the Guncannon's model number, it should be like the Rick Dias and have both model numbers listed. You can make the one in the infobox RX-77 since that's what it's most recently listed as in-game. ~ Yuu (talk) 20:33, August 21, 2012 (UTC) ::Okay, I think I get it. So for the Spirits unit list, I suggest we change just "Zaku II" to "Zaku II F Type" and have that just link to the "Zaku II" page. I'll edit it so you can see what I mean. ::Lololol yeah I was looking at that wiki for the list of units when I was doing that big list. That makes a lot of sense - I should have just gone into the game myself and checked the gallery >_> ::Okay, I'll go list both model numbers on Guncannon/Guntank like you said, then. ~ Darkslime (talk) 21:58, August 21, 2012 (UTC) :::To what end? That's part of what the appearances section on the unit page is there for, resolving name discrepancies in order to be able to refer to each unit by only one name in all other instances. :::Why? Didn't feel like completing your gallery? I could sympathize if so, Portable wasn't very good. You also missed a handful of units when you did the World list. You might find it easier to work from in-game galleries than the wikis where you can, it's worth trying. ~ Yuu (talk) 07:11, August 22, 2012 (UTC) ::::Well, I figure since it's a list for G Generation Spirits, we should probably list them the same way they're listed in-game. ::::Yeah, I got tired of Portable fairly quickly, so I never really got very far. When I was doing the World list, I started listing transformed units at some point in the middle, so I don't really remember. Did you add in what I missed already? I'll go into my gallery and do it if you haven't. It's probably the only game I have 100% in. ~ Darkslime (talk) 13:06, August 22, 2012 (UTC) :::::It can lead to some minor confusion though, plus there are some really bad units in particular when it comes to how they've been named over the series like the GP02A and EW Gundams. It's just simpler to use one universal name for each unit than to keep track of a unit's name in each game and name it correctly where appropriate, expect other users to do the same, and clean up after them when they fail to. :::::Yes, I added the missing ones when I initially renamed everything. ~ Yuu (talk) 14:50, August 22, 2012 (UTC) ::::::In those particular cases I agree, but it's far more intuitive in this specific case to keep the "F Type" suffix on, and looks a whole lot better in the list when placed before the J Type. After all, "Zaku II" and "Zaku II F Type" refer to the same unit. For other things, we can get away with putting "Wing Gundam Zero (EW) (listed as Wing Zero Custom)" in the unit list - since they're **completely** different names, rather than just a "full name vs. short name" thing. I'm going to have to stand my ground on this one. Darkslime (talk) 14:57, August 23, 2012 (UTC) Keep in mind that the primary demographic of the wiki can't read Japanese. They generally won't notice if a name is different and it really makes no difference to them what it was actually called, which is why it's mostly kept to just the unit's appearances section. In fact as I said, referring to a unit by several names only propagates confusion; they can't read what they're supposed to be calling the unit from the game itself and are more likely to start accidentally using an outdated name incorrectly if they're plastered all over the wiki. The wiki has to be made with ease of use of a person who does not speak Japanese in mind, and this change goes against that. And there's no room for notes. You keep forgetting that I'm eventually converting these lists into tables. ~ Yuu (talk) 17:28, August 23, 2012 (UTC) :This doesn't have anything to do with confusing the user. Keep in mind that the primary demographic of this wiki will be people who probably know quite a bit about Gundam already. And if they don't, they'll only be coming here for one game, most likely. I don't think it propogates confusion at all. We can put notes at the end of the article, and link it using references like all other Wikis do. I think we need to put this kind of accuracy first. ~ Darkslime (talk) 17:55, August 23, 2012 (UTC) ::What you're worrying about is like speaking to a blind person and worrying that you made an offensive gesture when they're only listening to your voice anyway. This sort of accuracy has no relevance to the wiki's demographic, they can't read the difference between Name Variation A and Name Variation B in the actual game so they won't know that when you talk about a Mass Production Type Guncannon in NEO or SEED you're supposed to call it a Guncannon Mass Production Type, and it won't matter to them when they go and read a NEO or SEED page and find that it's called by its name in the later games instead. So yes, it does have to do with confusing the user, because you're using multiple names for a single unit and telling everyone to use the correct one according to the context when they could never read any of the names to begin with. Their knowledge, on the other hand, is completely useless here. How will a reader's knowledge of Gundam help them know that the Hazel was called Gundam Hazel in Spirits but just Hazel in Wars and World? Why should we have to do something that necessitates notes when there's a perfectly viable alternative that requires no explanation and makes things easier for the people that the wiki is supposed to be for? ~ Yuu (talk) 18:42, August 23, 2012 (UTC) :::Because listing "Zaku II" and then "Zaku II (J Type)" looks dumb to me. :) ~ Darkslime (talk) 15:42, August 24, 2012 (UTC) :::Also, if we do it your way, then we're going to have to change all these names to the latest "version" every time G Generation decides to pull a fast one on us and change the names slightly, or include the J Type too, or whatever. I'd rather rename a single page for the unit than go through every page that refers to it as one thing and rename it to the other thing. ~ Darkslime (talk) 15:45, August 24, 2012 (UTC) ::::If you just want to change it because it looks dumb to you then consider that there are units that will look dumb if we do it the other way as well, because G Generation has used some really stupid names for things before. So I'm not going to make a change that makes it overall more confusing for people just because you don't like how one particular naming instance looks when we can't totally escape from that anyhow. ::::I'm aware of that and it's a consequence I've already taken into account and accepted when deciding to do things this way. I don't mind doing the work when it happens if it means making the wiki less confusing for people. If you don't want to touch it then by all means don't. The name changes are relatively few in number with each game anyway and they're usually kept to the minor units, so realistically at most I'll just have to pull up a list of pages which link to the offending units, put on some music, and zone out for half a day or so. ~ Yuu (talk) 17:48, August 24, 2012 (UTC)